I'll try to explain how the decisions were made, you can judge for yourselves whether it was right or wrong. Let me start by saying though that nobody in the administration believes that either player installed the modification with the intention of cheating. We are aware it is a modification used by quite a lot of players because of the corresponding siege server. That being said, our rules lay out a clear definition of what is considered cheating:
§ 2 I said:
It is strictly prohibited to gain an advantage by modifying texture files or using game modifications such as aimbots or autoblock. Every player that is found to have modified texture files or using game modifications will be banned from the tournament. Exceptions from this rule are listed in Appendix A.
The part that applies in both cases is "gain an advantage by modifying texture files". By adding the option to show the class setup of the enemy team, the modification obviously does modify game files in a way that it gives players using the module an advantage that players who are not using the module do not have.
The rules does not take into account whether the available information was actually used or not, neither does it take into account the intentions of the player. Why you may ask, because this is what your complaint are mainly based on. The main reason, as we have already lined out in the case of GrafBlade, is an issue of trust. The main source of information to judge these kind of potential offenses are screenshots. But when you are looking at those screenshots, you cannot tell whether the information was actually used or not, and you also cannot tell what the players intentions were when using these modifications. Obviously we could speak to the players, but they could be lying to us. Any cheater who uses modifications with the intention of cheating will tell you it was an accident when you ask him. No cheater would be truthful and say he did use those modifications in order to cheat, because he has no incentive to do so.
So, there is no way for the administration to decide whether information was used or not, and also whether the intention behind using said modifications was cheating or something else. Therefore it seems unreasonable for us to put these aspects into the rule, as it leaves the door wide open for abuse from the side of the administration.
Example: Let's say player A was found out to be using modified game files, but it was actually an accident and he didn't want to use them, he just forgot to change the module. The administration looks into the case and after speaking to the player and his teammates, comes to the conclusion that he actually didn't want to cheat and let's him get away. Then player B is caught using modifications as well, and he actually wanted to cheat. Again the administration speak to him and his teammates, and this time they come to the conclusion that he wanted to cheat. Player B is angry about it, obviously, and calls the administration biased, afterall they let player A get away after he had told them that is was an accident, why didn't they do the same for player B?
How are we supposed to react to such accusations of bias? I don't think we can at all, I can only argue that I
think I know what the players intentions were, I
don't know though. In an even worse scenario, player B could be so charming when talking to the administration that they fall for him and actually believe he didn't want to cheat (even though it was his intention) and let him get away as well. In either case we end up with a bad situation for both the tournament and the administration, which is why we did not include these two aspects that your complaints are based on in the rule.
We are only checking whether the modification does provide the player with an advantage that players without the modification do not have. In the case of the NeoGK mod, the ability to see the class setup of your opponent at the press of Tab is such an advantage that others without the module don't have, that's not debatable.
We know this may cause frustration when we also have to suspend players who actually did not want to cheat, but it is the only way for us to ensure we can ban players when they did want to cheat at this point with the evidence we have to judge these cases. Nobody in the administration has any joy banning players from the tournament, if it was up to we would have a clean tournament without any incidents of this sort, it means more enjoyment for the teams and less work for us. All we can do is try to be as transparent as possible.
I hope you can at least understand why we feel like we had to proceed as we did. Again, it's for the better of the community and its tournaments in general, not because we enjoy banning players.
Banned
). You only find it stupid now that you are affected by this rule; I personally do not find it stupid. 
